This week we will be looking at analyzing and developing arguments. Find an article or social media post to analyze. Use this to begin practicing your rhetorical analysis. Break the text down and figure out why and how they are using persuasion. Here are some questions to guide your analysis.
- Who is the audience? Who are they targeting?
- How are they presenting themselves? Author’s persona?
- What do they want you to believe or understand?
- What is their purpose or agenda? Why are they writing this?
- What appeals are they using? Ethos, Logos, Pathos?
- What argument are they making?
- What is their tone like? Are they respectful, dismissive, or insulting?
- What claims and evidence do they use, if at all?
- What implicit and explicit assumptions are there?
Make sure your journal response is at least 250 words long. Comment below with your response.
Professor Ramos' Blog 
Where do I begin with this video? Here is a YouTube video titled “We Don’t Apologize for the Truth” from the NRA YouTube channel where Grant Stinchfield aggressively defends a previous NRA advertisement by Dana Loesch. In this video, Stinchfield attacks what he calls “the violent Left” by mocking them with phrases such as, “for anyone in the violent Left who is having a meltdown over Dana Loesch’s NRA ad, get over yourself.” Stinchfield continues this inappropriate, and inaccurate speech as he proceeds to back up his argument with fallacies such as describing artistic statements in media as “open calls to assassinate the president”. His fallacies only continue as he states that the Left “burn down buildings” and “attack people in the streets” when majority of “Left” protests have been peaceful, and have, for an overwhelming majority of the time, ended in violence as a result of law enforcement or other hate groups, (which rarely experience police violence when protesting.) Stinchfield suggests the incidents of radical far-left violence are accurate representations of the Left. His examples include incidents such as the Alexandria Baseball Field shooting and the Berkeley peaceful protest, which was interrupted by masked radical-leftists. These incidents only strengthen the argument of restricting access to firearms and does not prove the ideology that the Left are predominantly violent and childish as Stinchfield would like to believe. It is so difficult to remain emotionally impartial to these heinous statements when Stinchfield literally refers to the Left as people who “actively burn down our country because you can’t get over the fact that your so-called progressive didn’t win the election.” Stinchfield reveals a clip of Loech’s NRA advertisement in which she states that the fight against the “lying media” is with the “fist of truth”. This video is riddled with ridiculously obvious fallacies and wildly inappropriate, unprofessional, and even sexual speech. It is also steered by a man that is overcome with negative emotions, hatred, and ignorance. (Which is ironic, considering his stance on the Left’s inability to “grow up”.) Lord, help us all.
LikeLike
This is a tweet I got off of the twitter of American conservative political commentator, Tomi Lahren. This is a photoshopped picture of Hillary Clinton be arrested with a comment saying “judgement day is coming”. This is trying to promote the conservative agenda of locking up Hillary Clinton over something she cannot be tried for anymore. They are trying to push that the “left is wicked” and that our leaders are evil. The tone and the presentation of this is very childish and is hard to believe someone when they pull out a picture made by them. The ethical appeal Trump has is so high that people are easily persuaded by pictures like this. It also plays into their emotional appeal and whether their vote swings left or right. However, there is no logical appeal behind any of this. It is a joke made for people on the right, but especially the left (cuz lol they stupid)
The fact they use Hillary Clinton in handcuffs is actually very ironic considering Trump has lost five of his top men that got him in office because they are being investigated or have already pleaded guilty to fraud! Even Trump’s son in law is being investigated for fraud. Whereas Clinton is free with no charges against her.
LikeLike
This is a commercial from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security. They are trying to bring awareness to drivers about the dangers of not wearing a seatbelt while driving. The commercial starts off showing a man in a wheelchair wearing a halo ring. A halo ring is a device used to prevent movement of the head/neck while cervical spine (vertebrae along the neck) injuries heal. This is indicating he was in a car wreck and not wearing his seatbelt. He is looking out the window, hearing the sounds from outside, maybe wishing he was out there like he once was. Then in walks a woman, possibly his wife. She picks up his hand gently rubs his arm. He does not show movement, possibly he is paralyzed from his injuries. The woman looks down at him with pity while adjusting the bolts to his halo. It seems she loves him, cares for him, and feels sorry this happened to him. It then pans back to the man’s face and we can see a very noticeable scar on his head, maybe indicating that in the car wreck he went through the windshield. The woman caresses his face and he closes his eyes with a look of sorrow and longing, undoubtedly mourning this kind of life. The text that comes across the screen reads, “The fine for not wearing a seatbelt is $25. Some people pay more.” This may be a message to those who get in their car and not buckle up thinking if they get pulled over it’s a mere $25. There is a bigger price on the line. “SEAT BELTS SAVE LIVES CLICK IT OR TICKET”. This commercial shows us that it is not just a matter of possible death, but the severity that injuries from a car wreck can have without killing. It could be life changing.
LikeLike
Linked above is a post I came across on instagram by @wetheurban. WeTheUrban Magazine is an online publication dedicated to everything related to culture, including: music, art, fashion, photography and more. Their audience would be anyone on Instagram or twitter with an interest in any of the subjects I listed above. A lot of their post focus on self-awareness and being aware of what’s going on around us. They also like to post quotes to encourage self-care and promote positivity in your daily life. This particular post highlights the timeline in the united states from when slavery began in 1619 to our present day 2018. It shows the amount of time that “black” people have been “free”. The caption for this post said “African Americans have been free in this country for less time than they were enslaved. Do the math: Blacks have been free for 152 years, which means that most Americans are only two to three generation away from slavery, this is not that long ago” (wetheurban). They don’t provide any citations but I researched the dates and they do match historical records. They also do state that they designed the timeline specifically for their website. I don’t think they are making any claims, there simply highlighting that if you really look at it and think, slavery and segregation happened recently, and It seems like they are trying to say, let’s not forget about this, it’s still happening today. I think they want people to remember and not to forget. The tone they use is neutral, its purpose is just to educate and state a fact.
LikeLike
https://www.healthmagreviews.com/overweight-and-obesity-in-america/
A picture can give out a powerful message just like words. When I came across this image it really intrigued me. The way I analyzed this image is how younger American generations are becoming obese. On the right is an little old tiny man, and on the left is a big, overweight younger man sitting on the bench lifting the old man’s side. The bench can resemble a weight scale and how it is not even close to being balanced. As we also see the older man is lifting his glasses and is surprised on what he sees. This can mean that obesity “snuck” up on this younger generation of America, and now it is surprisingly out of control.
The audience is younger generations of America . The illustrator is trying to show how obesity is a problem of today and it is out of control, and that there needs to be a change. This image mostly uses appeals to logic (logos) , and is trying to put forward that this is a problem that need to be fixed. Well, it can also appeal to emotions (Pathos) by giving an image to younger generation parents and make them think if their children are going on the right path. Another way it uses pathos is how shocked the older man is at how obese the younger man. It creates emotions(empathy,insecurity,..), because no one wants to be stared at for the wrong reasons.
LikeLike
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2018/03/02/oh-look-another-reason-why-we-should-be-skeptical-with-democrats-on-gun-control-n2456479
The post shown can be decrypted seeing Nancy Pelosi the Democratic minority leader of The United States House of Representatives. Meeting in congress to try to ban the second amendment. Conservative leaders are trying to work with the democrats to create a plan on gun control, after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida. The republican party looks to strengthening back ground checks in mental health, and limiting of high capacity magazines, maybe even raising the age to buy a gun to 21 as seen in California. Democrats like Nancy Pelosi on the other hand want to ban all guns as seen in Australia. We can see by the new legislation that will be taking place is going to lead to the use of rhetoric. On one hand with the democrats we will see the use of persuasion in ethos. Majority of liberals are going to agree with Pelosi that guns need to be outlawed which they will in turn have an emotional appeal. On the other hand, the republicans will shut it down as they won’t see the use of logos or see the extreme logic in banning of all guns regardless of type. Gun control is a huge topic now with the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, yes something has to be done but the banning of guns is not the answer. Gun owners believe that It’s not hard to see why conservatives, Second Amendment supporters, and gun owners distrust Democrats on this issue.
LikeLike
This video is targeting people who are interested in, and curious about fashion trends, foreign fashion, and subculture fashion. The Author’s persona is very much respectful and curious along with the audience. They have the attitude of someone willing to learn about new things. In the video they want the audience to understand that self-expression through fashion can be therapeutic for the person coordinating and wearing the styles. Their agenda is to educate about this particular fashion style: Yami Kawaii (sick cute) and how it challenges the societal expectations of Japan. Throughout the video they appeal to Ethos, Logos, and Pathos. The professionalism of the video appeals to Ethos. The clean editing, the interviews with relevant influencers and artists, and even a professor who specializes on the impact of this culture, along with the confident narrating done by the host build on the appeal to Ethos. The host herself, Connie Wang is well versed in the world of fashion, having worked at Teen Vogue and currently working in Refinery 29 as a Fashion Features Director. They appeal to logos by mentioning that expressing oneself through cute fashions like this is seen as a form of therapy, as well as stating that talking openly about painful things feels better than keeping it in. By not hiding depression or suicidal feelings, these people feel more honest and happy with themselves. This video appeals to Pathos by having the guests speak openly about their experiences. Speaking openly and honestly about suicidal thoughts and feelings is not easy, and the guests on this show definitely show that. Their bravery and honesty really appeal to Pathos, even if one does not experience suicidal thoughts or feelings. The argument that they are making is that fashion is a form of expression, especially with niche subcultures like this. Even though this fashion makes some people uncomfortable, the people who are wearing it feel the most comfortable, which is the only thing that matters. The tone of the author is very respectful of the subculture and its fashion, even if it does not resonate well with the host. They claim that this fashion is therapeutic to its wearers, and the evidence is the guests on the show. Each one mentions how the style and dark themes soothe them and make them feel better and more honest. Fashion should be about the wearer and not about how well you fit into trends. The things we put on our body should serve us and ultimately be for us, not for everyone else.
LikeLike
https://www.instagram.com/p/Bf0mzQCnQkU/?taken-by=illuminatikillersofficial
This Instagram post presents a picture of large-scale traffic and has a caption across the image which reads ” Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for in order to get the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it.”
There is a large audience that the author of this post is targeting which includes his Instagram followers, anti-conformists looking for inspiration, and conformists that might not of thought about their career cycle in this way. The author of this post has a persona that is “Instagram famous”. He currently has 95.6K followers and posts a new enlightening post almost daily. His Instagram account is well known for its philosophical posts.
The author is aiming to help me in recognizing the ridiculous and repetitive nature of having a 9:00 to 5:00 job. They are writing this to try and influence a change in society’s current goals so that we don’t all succumb to one typical custom way of living.
The author uses logic by describing a process depicting conformists as working to work. He uses ethos by showing the picture which most people among city-based American society can relate to. His caption may trigger an emotional response to someone who works a 9:00 to 5:00 job by causing them to feel simple or unhappy with what they are doing.
The argument that the author makes is that if conforming to this simple repetitive cycle is considered “normal”, then it’s not very exciting to be “normal”.
There is a source mentioned below the picture that is a link to another Instagram page titled “Eddie”. I know personally that Eddie is a political meme creator, but there is no solid evidence to prove that he is the creator of this meme.
An implicit assumption that can be made is of the photo in that all of the cars in the photo are on their way to work. We really have no true way of know why all of those cars are driving through large-scale traffic. We don’t even know the place or time in which this photo was taken. This post is meant to influence people to rethink their career cycle and whether being “normal” is any way of “living”.
-Jack Adams
LikeLike
http://www.bforbel.com/2013/05/trying-new-mascara-commercial-vs-reality.html
In this meme there is a side-by-side image of a beautiful model on the left, and not so good-looking cartoon character on the right. The author is poking fun of the way vendors advertise beauty products, and they turn out to not be what the customer receives, or the customer doesn’t end up looking anything like the advertisement. The image on the left, advertisement of the vendor’s mascara, there is a beautiful woman with fair-clear complexion, flawless make-up, perfect facial features, and of course perfect long-dark-voluminous eye lashes. The adds drama and boldness to the lashes of the model to emphasize what the mascara “will” make women’s eyelashes appear as after they buy and apply the mascara. The audience for this add are women that love the dramatic eyelash look and want to be beautiful. Women tend to spend significant amounts money on cosmetics each year. Vendors spend millions of dollars on marketing their product and use technology, photoshop, and alter model’s beauty to make them look perfect so that their product sells. This is deceitful because most women will not look like the digitally enhanced image that the vendor created. In the other image the author has an image of Cruella Deville using the mascara that was advertised by the mascara vendor, but it looks nothing like the image on the left. The message that this author is trying to send is that women are so obsessed with being beautiful that they will buy into the lie; that if they buy beauty products being advertised by a beautiful woman then they will be as beautiful as them too. The author wants women to stop and be realistic and not get sold on a lie, or at least to not have these high expectations.
LikeLike
A YouTube Channel called Ditch the Label recently posted a video examining gender equality in current society. In the video, they performed an experiment to see which gender would receive the most help by passersby while carrying two heavy suitcases upstairs. Their experiment concluded that women receive more help from passersby than men. To illustrate, the video provided evidence stating, “Matt was helped 40% of the time,” and, “Sophie was helped 95% of the time.”
Their purpose is to challenge people who are gender bias, meaning they believe women need rescuing because they are helpless, and that men are capable of doing things themselves because they are strong. Additionally, the name of the publisher, “Ditch the Label,” and their slogan, “Your world. Prejudice free,” illustrates they are against gender bias. This video is intended for everyone to their own interpretation; however, the publishers are targeting people who believe all men are masculine and all woman are feminine. The authors are presenting themselves as respectful, objective, and informative. I find that their tone is respectful because the video doesn’t judge or shame anyone who disagrees. They allow the viewer to decide whether it is right or wrong, and they allow the viewers to think about this topic themselves. Additionally, I believe their tone is objective and informative because they provide evidence supporting their claim as well as perform a social experiment. An example of their objective and informative ton is shown when the authors define “chivalry,” which means “courteous behavior. Especially that of a man towards a woman.” Furthermore, they introduce their claim by asking the question, “But in a society aspiring to be equal is that fair?” According to their evidence, they argue that gender labels impact the way we help others by acknowledging the assumptions of gender bias. An implicit assumption shown is that girls need help and boys don’t need help. An explicit assumption shown is that genders shouldn’t be a determination whether or not to help someone in need. In order to persuade their audience, they use ethos, pathos, and logos to convince the audience that gender bias is wrong. First, they use ethos to appeal to the viewers ethics by illustrating it is morally incorrect to assume that a woman in need deserves more help than a man in need. The authors continuously question whether or not it is “fair” to assume this idea. Furthermore, they use logos by performing their own experiment to determine who which gender will receive more help. Lastly, they use pathos when they define “chivalry,” and by bolding the words “man,” “woman,” “equal,” and “fair,” which acknowledges they are challenging gender bias and trying to appeal to their viewers emotions. Ultimately, Ditch the Label want to persuade their audience to believe in gender equality and ditch the gender bias.
LikeLike
https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/968573921187516416
The above video is from the Conservative Mecca, known as CPAC, a meeting meant to show off the best and brightest of the Republican Party and present new ideas for the Conservative platform. At this meeting gun violence was a loaded issue (pun intended) throughout the day, with many presenting their ideas on how to combat such an epidemic. From arming to teacher to putting metal detectors in schools every idea was presented except “ban some types of guns.” When asked how they could reconcile these ideas with shooting survivors literally begging for gun reform Katie Hopkins, a noted South African Conservative commentator, answered boldly, “Gun owners feel sorry that those kids have been manipulated by the media” further pushing the narrative that there is some sort of conspiracy going on behind the free press wanting to attack Conservative Americans.
The author is presenting herself as the great defender of the United States Constitution, working for the everyday American. Easily dismissing what is arguably the greatest pathos argument in existence: that we need to protect children, by simply saying that the children are young and can easily be manipulated. The author is not really working to reach a median audience or the other side to change their opinions, the author only wants to speak to people who share her ideas. She uses absolutely no evidence and doesn’t work to pretend that she does. Her tone is decisively dismissive, she doesn’t see the Stoneman Douglas High School Shooting survivors as informed people or ones worthy of being listened to.
LikeLike
https://youtu.be/WlUvQkW4B1k in this ad by Carl’s jr it shows a beautiful girl who first appears to be naked as she is walking in farmers market promoting the natural burger and the guys are looking at her because shes wearing some short shorts and a bra. The main audience for the commercial is men and young guys. the way that they present themselves is out there they threw this girl who appears to be naked as she walks and all the guys are with their mouths open and looking at her. they want you to believe that they are the first fast food chain that is serving a 100 percent all natural burger with no antibiotics or hormones. they are writing this because they think that they are the first fast food chain to have a natural burger and to show that there competition has nothing to beat them with because they serve frozen patties. they are using more pathos than logos or ethos because they’re using the girl to stir up the viewers emotion.
they are arguing that they do not use frozen meat that has been tampered with by man. they are being very respectful because they aren’t naming the competition directly but they do make it obvious that they wont use frozen meat with artificial hormones in the meat. they don’t use any evidence to support themselves at all they think that by putting a half naked girl in front of us well forget . they don’t give us any data at all stating what they say is true and that the others are wrong they are using the girl to our attention about what they say so that we don’t question them at all.
LikeLike
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi_jqbSl8_ZAhULxmMKHQ77Ch4QjRx6BAgAEAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdavidsztybel.info%2F14.html&psig=AOvVaw0Dz1dEMJ1ueESkOMvMWHj8&ust=1520133133514320
Just look at this picture, analyze it, breathe it in. What do you feel when you see an animal in such an enslaved environment. Envision an alternate universe in which you replace this cow in its current situation. Each one of your friends are being reluctantly summoned to their death sentence, you aren’t oblivious to your surroundings, the cries of your family starts pestering you until you give in and your mind shuts down. The final indication bell increases in intensity the closer you get towards the metal sarcophagus. It isn’t your fault that you can’t decide your fate, the humans that are enslaving you are more powerful than you. Many employees contributing to these atrocities justify their actions by telling the press there is nothing inhumane about their work and the animals in question were made by God for consumption. A simple firsthand viewing of any aspects of the meat industry will fill you with the opposite of euphoria, complete disgust. Soon after you take a visit to a slaughterhouse you will regret all that you have eaten and question why you have given into this faulty system, each time you consume a meat product you grab the hand of a newborn calf and force a signature out of it unwillingly forging the poor creature’s death certificate. Many people are guilty of making the excuse of “it is just an animal, it is just human nature for us to use what god has given us” this statement becomes an illusion when you substitute a human in the place of any of these animals. We are not meant to increase our survivability by killing animals more powerful than us with mechanical factors. For example, Take a look at our species the homo sapien the only reason why humanity as a whole is alive is because we impose our power on other species in various ways whether it is destruction of an animals vital habitat (not rightfully ours but indeed the land of the organism that preoccupied it), or the way we use weapons in mass quantities to fight a battle that we surely won’t come out victorious if absent of, it is evident that a piece of the puzzle is missing and maybe we should not be the dominators because we are not fit to survive without our endless supply of industrial exploitations. I believe that after man kind acquired technology it gave us the chance to wage war against nature, consider the early ages of life as explained by scientist in which the early humans were not able to access the things we as a world have today, ask yourself if you are truly meant to prolong your live with methods such as a gastric bypass surgery, or on a less vital note, your hygiene. For those of you that believe in a higher power do you think your god is allowing you to take the path you are taking, remember you are superficial, humanity as a whole has constructed every form of medicine, vaccination etc. in an effort to solve their own problems, taking matters such as death into their own hands. How can we be so sure we aren’t creating more problems in our constant race to solve previous ones. I for sure do not have the answers to any of these questions I am just trying to spark some curiosity in who ever is listening. I do not believe it is our “Manifest Destiny”, I truly feel that we are advancing technology and hyperbolizing the quantities in which we produce the food for the masses to fast and we are unaware of the stones we are setting. It is inevitable that if we continue to advance without seeing natures limitations we are doomed and the extermination of humanity will commence when the time comes, we will realize the consequences of our actions when it is to late because many people are too focused on the moment at hand without diving into what the past is warning us of. We were given only a glimpse of the epidemics nature can dish out to us when the ebola crisis broke loose, many deaths came in such a quick succession and we could do nothing about and we will never be able to do anything about it, diseases to the likes of which have never been seen before will unearth in our near future and easy scientific common sense will label humans as the cause of them (not to mention the variety of cataclysmic events that could arise in the near future based on predictions of human contributing factors like the inconceivable amount of greenhouse gas we are putting into the atmosphere due to our ignorance and blindness to science warning us of what is to come. I know what I am saying sounds very vague and cliche but I will bet money that humans will regret their actions and no matter how hard we try we will not be able to do anything about it. “We couldn’t do nothing about it” is a saying I’m sure the species labeled as lesser/more intelligent than us are reciting in their heads waiting to utter it just before they die at the hands of us. U.S. ? maybe, it depends who you are blaming and what your stance is on what food you are eating and how much of it you are eating. It all comes down to whether or not you want to question normalcy or not, and again sorry for sounding cliche but, you are the author of your own life story you have the pen, do you have ink in your pen? what type of pen do you have? But more importantly what canvas will you choose to write on? I like to quote one of my favorite artists Bones when he says, “Sick animals deceased riding interstates, off the truck to the market now your dinner plate! and you think you clean? none of my labels read BHT, Plant based protein slows me like morphine everything saturated everything for me, for you if you want it to I know its hard cause the humans messed up the loop, sick people getting money what the **** else is a business wanting, just breathe don’t think to deep where the undertow heavy and the current don’t leave” I like this quote a lot because not only was it versed so eloquently in combination with such a mysterious beat, but the rapper is also introducing the human produced loop into the conversation saying it is messed up. It is all just thinking honestly, your quality of life can be greatly improved if you just study your surroundings. In conclusion despite me drifting heavily off the intended topic, the image I have chosen displays a lot of ethos and pathos at least for me because I can imagine myself as an animal unsure of its surroundings, unsure of its next meal, unsure if it will wake up to see the sun again, and trust me these are not far fetched. Just consider how fearful you are of death, and if you are (which everyone on earth is regardless of how many times you try and convince yourself of the opposite) you have every right to be afraid, I believe our biggest fear comes from the talk of death because we are uncertain and uncertainty brings fear which is why many people would rather create an illusion of certainty at the expense of others. And no if you go vegan/vegetarian or don’t eat meat etc. there is plenty of plant based environmental friendly forms of matter to choose from that will give you more than enough nutrients to fuel your beautiful bodies. I am not an anti-meat fanatic but if you exclude meat and dairy out of your life for as little as a week you will think your a new person, you might even want to change your name and shave your damn head because the old you is the weaker you. I also want to tell everyone who stumbles upon my scripture to always remind themselves that they have nothing to complain about because no matter your current mood or situation you will always be more fortunate than at least 1 person on this planet because you are allowed to do things so statutory such as walk, talk, breath, sleep, learn, eat … LIVE !
J777
LikeLike
http://www.facebook.com/NowThisHer/videos/1224633651000841/?hc_ref=ARQLKfNmOsGLZfQ3IVHTYJVm5uxeL7_pF9sZlzbofr9reGDw7FDjX0prKl63Z1eC40M
In the video, Beatrice Fihn a Swedish Jurist introduces and talks about the group called The International Campaign to Abolish nuclear weapons(ICAN). She discusses how the group ICAN has convinced 122 countries to stop testing, manufacturing and even possibly using nuclear weapons, she has also stated that they have received the noble peace prize of 2017. Beatrice Fihn uses her credibility as a jurist to convince not only people in communities but also people in positions of political power to support and strive for an end of the use of nuclear weapons. She is trying to persuade her audience to pressure, and inform the political figures into supporting or looking into the ICAN organization and its actions. She appeals to the audiences by criticizing and scolding the possible actions of the people in power, stating that “and this kind of idea that somehow indiscriminately slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians will be a better alternative than sitting down and negotiating. I mean its ridiculous”. She does this to gain the support of not only the civilian population but also with an intended purpose of causing people to pressure the political figures to support this treaty and organization. She then appeals to the women and men by providing proven illness that mainly women face when nuclear weapons are used at any time, they range from miscarriages, stillbirth, completely destroy the reproductive system, even causing the child to be born with different diseases, again this creates sympathy amongst the audience causing them to pressure their political figures to support the organization.
LikeLike
Click to access freedman.pdf
This is an evaluation of video games in relation to violence made by Jonathan L. Freedman of the Department of Psychology at the University of Toronto. His audience is those who will research the relations between these two things, as well as those people who look to affirm their beliefs whether negative or positive towards the subject. He is presenting himself as a very credible person being a part of the Department of Psychology at Toronto University and since the subject is seeing if video games and violent media cause violence crimes, being a psychologist means he knows what he is talking about. He wants to make it clear that it is nearly impossible to get a real conclusion from any information gathered, as in order for violence to be related to violent media in a test someone could just play a video game and then go outside and shoot someone, and in order for it to be false the would play the video games and then go outside and talk to their neighbor. In order for it to be correct, crime would have to be intentional and thus the test itself would be a crime which is part of the point they are trying to get across, the entire discussion is on a case by case basis however those who experience more violent media tend to be more aggressive. He is using Logos using studies and tests taken to add credibility to his analysis. He is making the argument that aggression can be related to media or video game violence but with a lack of relevant sources and ability to test making it nearly impossible to make a full conclusion. He seems to be respectful to both sides of the argument as he does attribute aggression to violent media, however says a lack of information leads to no true conclusion. He uses tests and studies conducted by other researchers to analyse the subject. The explicit assumptions are those where a lack of sources leads him to a half conclusion where violent video games are related to aggression, where as the implicit assumption is that the research could be wrong as there is very little information on the subject and cannot be confirmed as the truth.
LikeLike
https://twitter.com/saima98_x/status/967829300136292355
So I came across this video on Twitter. It was about a two little boys that was under a collapsed building. There were people everywhere trying to bring them back to live, by performing CPR and other medical procedures. At one point a man (assuming to be the dad) grabs his son and starts screaming/crying in agony. There The Retweet caption stated: THIS IS REAL, HAPPENING 7 INST GETTING ENOUGH ATTENTION 17 AMERICANS DIED & IT WAS DEEMED A TRAGEDY THERE ARE CHILDREN DYING DAILY IN SYRIA FAMILIES BEING TORN APART EHY ISNT THIS EVERYWHERE??? Ya Allah grant their parents sabr and the children Jannah. The audience is for anyone who cares. For anyone that has a heart, but I also feel like it narrows down to women in particular only because women tend to be more sensitive. Don’t get me wrong a man can react the same way but as a women I feel like it might stay in our minds for a longer time. While observing this video I could only watch it without sound. I did not want to hear the boys cry in agony. They want us to understand that there are places in this world that is also as bad as mass shooting in America. It is definitely creating an emotion appeal to the audience, like previous said. Seeing innocent children, hit us to the core. Some of us are parents, and we are also sons and daughters. The retweet caption is arguing that it is happening everywhere. That other countries should have the same attention as the ones from America.
LikeLike
This Dove ad shows a black woman at first, who then takes off her shirt to reveal a white woman, who then takes off her shirt to reveal a Middle Eastern woman. This commercial then came under fire as possibly being racist. The interpretation by many being that the commercial is insinuation that black people are “dirty”. Dove was targeting women, all women, as their audience so they could by their products to clean themselves. It was only a three second ad, with the true intentions probably just being that women of all colors use their product and are clean. However, there is always a team of people whose job is to look over anything the company plans to put out to make sure it’s “okay” to be put out. Therefore, it makes it hard for the public to believe that no one in that company saw that ad and thought it wasn’t racist. Or, it makes us believe that did know it was racist and still put it out there, which could or could not be worse, depending on your interpretation. The ad is using the appeal of beautiful, clear skinned women to push their product, but the taking off of clothes makes the public assume that they are saying the black woman was dirty and the white woman wasn’t since it was done in that order. All in all, even though the ad itself (only being three seconds) didn’t make any claims that suggested racism, the fact that they put it out after it obviously had to be screened and deemed “OK”, makes it not right that no one analyzed the ad to see the implicit racism in it.
LikeLike
The video I linked, “Australian Students Stick it to Martin Shkreli”, was posted on The Daily Show’s YouTube channel. The video highlights a group of Australian high school students who replicated the drug Daraprim in 2016. Daraprim, an anti-parasite most commonly used to treat and prevent malaria, made headlines in 2015 after businessman Martin Shkreli raised the price up by more than 5,000 percent. The drug went from being $13.50 to $750 a pill, overnight. The group of Australian students were able to successfully replicate Daraprim for $2 a pill. Ronny Chieng, who travel from the United States to Australia to meet the students who replicated the drug, had a very comedic persona; he cracked a joke any chance he got. Ronnie and the students want the audience to understand that Shkreli’s choice was greedy and unnecessary. An underlying purpose that can be taken from this video is how easily pharmaceutical companies can take advantage of their customers. The video appeals to ethics by showing how unethical Shkreli is to make live-saving drug unattainable. Because the students were able to replicate the drug for only $2, logically, the price of $750 is absurd. Though the video is comedic, a lot of the time the tone was serious, and at one point one of the students insulted Shkreli.
Martin Shkreli is currently incarcerated because of the price hike of Daraprim.
LikeLike